Appeal of Beach

• Decision Date: 24 July 1903
• Citation: 55 A. 596,76 Conn. 118
• Parties: Appeal of BEACH.
• Court: Connecticut Supreme Court

55 A. 596

76 Conn. 118

Appeal of BEACH.

Supreme Court of Errors of Connecticut.

July 24, 1903.

Case Reserved from Superior Court, New Haven County; William T. Elmer, Judge.

Application by Mary E. Camp for the appointment of an administrator de bonis non of the estate of Moses S. Beach, deceased. From a judgment appointing one James E. Wheeler as such administrator, Charles Y. Beach appeals. Reversed.

The facts found by the trial court, upon an agreed statement of facts framed by the parties, so far as in any way material, are in substance these:

(1) Upon the death, on January 10, 1893, of Calvin B. Camp, father of Mary E. Camp, the applicant for administration in these proceedings, said Mary E. Camp became entitled to some $7,000 by reason of the failure of her father to account, as guardian, for money which came into his possession in 1808; he owning a life estate in the same, and she owning the fee or corpus. Her brother and sister each became entitled to about the same sum on the same grounds. Camp died utterly insolvent, having misappropriated and lost his children's money. In 1808 Calvin B. Camp was appointed guardian of each of these three children by the proper court in New York, and gave a guardian's bond to each child, in the sum of $10,000, for the faithful performance of his duty, with Moses S. Beach and one Merritt as sureties. The youngest of Camp's children became of age in 1876.

(2) Between 1888 and 1891 the three children were engaged in a litigation against their father, seeking by means of an accounting in a probate court in New York to secure possession of the money which came into his possession in 1868, winch litigation failed because they were not entitled to possession of the corpus, or any part thereof, until their father's death. Moses S. Beach knew of this litigation.

(3) Moses S. Beach died July 25, 1892, domiciled in New York, leaving a widow and five children. He left personal property amounting to about $7,500, and real estate In Arkansas valued at about $200,000. By reason of Beach being surety on the guardian bonds of 1868, his estate was liable to Camp's three children for the amounts due them upon their father's death. (This liability is assumed for the purposes of this case.)

(4) Moses S. Beach's estate was fully administered and settled in the New York court having jurisdiction thereof; the final account of the administrator being accepted and approved May 13, 1895. On April 28, 1893, and after the death of Camp, legal notice to the creditors of Beach's estate to present their claims was given. Camp's three children knew of Beach's death soon after it occurred, were then resident and domiciled in New York, and presented no claim against his estate.

(5) Upon Camp's death, in 1893, an accounting between his executor and his three children was commenced in the surrogate's court in New York, and decrees fixing the amount due each child were entered December 19, 1890, and these decrees were affirmed upon appeal February 15, 1901. Beach's administrator had knowledge of this litigation and of the claim against the bondsmen.

(6) Said Moses S. Beach had at all times in his own name, and owned and controlled by him, and left at his decease, property of a value more than equal to all his outstanding indebtedness and the amount of the claims based by the said three children of said Calvin B. Camp upon said bonds.

(7) Subsequent to February 15, 1901, Camp's children Inquired of two daughters of Beach concerning the location of any property belonging to Beach at his death, without success. Said children did not have actual knowledge of the location of the Arkansas real estate until apprised thereof in these proceedings.

(8) In the years 1891 and 1892 the said Charles Y. Beach purchased large amounts of real estate both in New Haven and Bridgeport, prior to which said dates he had owned no real estate in either of said cities.

(9) At no time has there been any tangible real or personal estate standing in the name of Moses S. Beach, and situated in the probate district of New Haven or the state of Connecticut.

(10) On May 9. 1902, Mary E. Camp applied for administration as a creditor of said deceased; and on July 3, 1902, said court of probate of New Haven passed an order appointing an administrator, from which this appeal was taken by said Charles Y. Beach, now a resident of Massachusetts.

(11) Moses S. Beach at his decease left no property of any kind in this state, unless the claims advanced by the appellee upon the above facts, as hereinafter set forth, constitute such property.

(12) Upon the above facts the appellee claims as follows, to wit: (a) That said realestate mentioned in paragraph 8 was purchased by the appellant with money belonging either to said Moses S. Beach in his lifetime or to his estate; (b) that said real estate belongs now to the estate of said Moses S. Beach, at least to the extent necessary to pay the judgment of said Mary E. Camp against the estate of C. B. Camp, and any other claims that may be duly presented against the estate of Moses S. Beach, and that therefore said claims and choses in action constitute property sufficient to give the court of probate jurisdiction under the statute; the sole purpose of the appointment of the administrator being to bring suit against Charles Y. Beach for a conveyance of said real estate to said administrator, or for its value in money, for the purpose of answering to said claims. The appellant claims that upon the above facts neither the court of probate for New Haven nor the superior court has jurisdiction to appoint an administrator.

A. Heaton Robertson and James E. Wheeler, for the applicant for administration.

Goodwin Stoddard and Arthur M. Marsh, for Charles Y. Beach.

HAMERSLEY, J. (after stating the facts). This is an application to the court of probate for the appointment of an administrator on the intestate estate of Moses s. Beach, made by Mary E. Camp, claiming to be a creditor. Upon her application the court of probate passed an order appointing James E. Wheeler administrator. Charles Y. Beach being a son of Moses S. Beach—appealed from this order to the superior court. The reasons of appeal are set forth in the appeal itself as follows: Moses S. Beach died on July 25, 1892, resident and domiciled in the state of New York. He left no property in the probate district of New Haven or in the state of Connecticut, and his estate was long since fully administered and settled in the courts of New York having jurisdiction thereof. Upon this appeal the superior court had full jurisdiction of the subject-matter, namly, the appointment of an administrator upon the estate of Moses S. Beach; and within the issues presented by the appeal the court tries the cause de novo. The...